Tweet
Listening to Daren Cahills comments about Andy Murray being able to hit to Rogers backand made me say "So What" To my way of thinking Roger has a great one handed backhand with more variety than any player on the tour. Today was a great example. He had as many backhand winners as Murray. Many of his other backhands either caused a forced error by Murray or set up the next shot for Roger. I think Roger always had a good backhand but in the last year or so his backhand has improved to where it is not a weakness but a major force in his game. Congrats to Roger on his victory today.
-
-
I agree.
Wondering if anyone else noticed that he seemed to be hitting that backhand with a bit more net clearance than usual. He was being aggressive with spin and angles instead of pace on most shots.
It also seemed like he had the confidence in his backhand to sustain a BH to BH rally long enough to pry open the court before he ran around for a FH or went for a BH winner. In other words, when he did flatten out the BH, it was on a shot where he had a clear chance for a winner.
On many shots, it seemed like Murray was anticipating that Federer would change the direction on those BH to BH rallies and go down the line, but then Fed would just keep it cross court. He kept Murray honest and off-balance. I thought it was a great game plan. -
Roger's BH and thoughts on match
Guys,
Your comments above are right on. I noticed immediately that Roger's backhand was hit with more spin than usual and plenty of net clearence. He also used the slice backhand very effectively and Murray could not do anything with it. All the commentators kept harping on the fact that Murray needed to go after Fed's backhand, and eventually set up his own backhand down the line. A shot that was missing in his arsenal. Federer was hitting his backhand with confidence and absolute no worries. He generated some beautiful angles and kept Murray on the move.
Fed's game plan was great, and it was nice to see he was playing confidently to pull it off.
What's dissappointing is that so many people picked Murray to win. They brought up the head to head record against Fed as well as "It's Murray's time". Call me crazy, but my money is on the guy who has won more grand slams than any other man in history, and has made it to 18 of the last 19 slam finals. Plus, people seem to forget that Grand slams are best of 5, not best of 3. Many guys have played great tennis for 2 sets to beat Roger, but when the pressure is on, I'm going with the guy that has been there and done won more than anyone else. There is something to be said for this consistency in big moments. It's one thing to beat Roger in Doha, or Indian Wells. The gut check is when your playing for a grand slam. That lump in your throat and tightness in your stomach will be a bit bigger knowing you are going to have to play lights out for three out of five sets.
Sorry for my tangent. Just passionate about this great game and very respectful of Roger's accomplishments.
Comment
-
I just watched the first set again.
One of the key points in the match was at 30-30 when Murray was serving at 3-4. First, Murray had already missed a bunch of first serves. He hit a second serve at 30 all, and Federer chipped it back. Murray ended up rolling a fairly easy rally ball to Fed's backhand, and Federer hit an unexpectedly sharp cross-court backhand to set up a down-the line backhand winner at go up 30-40.
This point started out in similar fashion. Murray missed his first serve, Federer chipped the second serve back, Murray rolled back a fairly easy backhand. This time, Federer ran around it and changed direction with an inside-in FH down the line, which opened up the court for him to end the point with an inside out FH to the open court.
In just two points, we get a look at some key factors and patterns that really set the tone for the rest of the match.Comment
-
Allen Fox February
Check out Allen Fox's article this month on Tennisplayer. He states that Federer has really imporved his topspin backhand.Comment
Comment